“I think eventually ESPN becomes a business that is sold directly to the consumers,” Mr. Iger said.

ESPN, which is majority-owned by Disney, could use information from that direct consumer relationship to customize its product and enable more personalization, which will engage fans in a “much more effective way," he said.

Mr. Iger cautioned that such an offering is not “right around the corner”; even five years down the line, he believes there won’t have been “significant change” in the pay TV business.

ESPN already has indicated it has interest in streaming some sporting events directly to consumers. Last fall, when it renewed a long-term rights deal with the National Basketball Association, the network began laying plans for an online video service that would allow people who aren't pay TV customers to stream live regular season games. Earlier this year, ESPN created a streaming service to offer the ICC Cricket World Cup to American fans without requiring that they have a cable subscription.

But selling ESPN's channel, as a whole, outside the pay TV bundle would be a major escalation of that strategy. Other media companies including CBS Corp. and Time Warner's HBO have taken the plunge with over-the-top services, but as a broadcaster and premium cable channel owner, respectively, they have different business models than ESPN.

If ESPN were to offer a direct-to-consumer streaming service, it would have to charge about $30 a month per customer to make the same money as it does under its current pay TV distribution model, some analysts say.

ESPN’s rate would depend on how many of its current subscribers it thinks it can retain in an 'a la carte' world. If only 20% of its current subscribers sign up, it would have to charge about $33 to ensure its revenue isn’t dented, according to an analysis by Nomura Securities analyst Anthony DiClemente. But if 40% subscribe, ESPN could charge about $16.